New guidelines/restrictions 18 August - Megathread

Route1

Just wondering what these new recommendations mean for offices. I’m back in office now, around 15 people in a fairly small office. We were working from home so have the capacity to. Should we be back to working from home as per guidelines today?

Thierry12

Why did ye come back?

Just curious

Route1

Early June

el Fenomeno

It's pretty much a reiteration of what was already in place - a government recommendation to WFH where possible but nothing that's enforced.

Van.Bosch

Route1 wrote: »

Just wondering what these new recommendations mean for offices. I’m back in office now, around 15 people in a fairly small office. We were working from home so have the capacity to. Should we be back to working from home as per guidelines today?

The guidelines were always WFH If possible

ChikiChiki

Advice basically hasn't changed.

Regardless, I would question the calibre of any employer who wants their staff in the office when they have remote working capability in the midst of a global pandemic.

gral6

As there is no light at the end of a tunnel while this crowd of clowns in power, this topic would with us for foreseeable future.

AMKC

I actually think the caretaker Government and Leo Varadkar were doing a better job advising us what we should not be doing than this new Government under Micheal Martin is currently just giving an unneeded press conference just to boast his own ego.

statesaver

18 cases in hospital and another 8 in ICU. Utter madness. And now no spectators at outside sporting events. Jesus Christ.

https://twitter.com/FergalBowers/status/1295766347637501953

JTMan

Route1 wrote: »

Just wondering what these new recommendations mean for offices. I’m back in office now, around 15 people in a fairly small office. We were working from home so have the capacity to. Should we be back to working from home as per guidelines today?

Yes.

Van.Bosch wrote: »

The guidelines were always WFH If possible

Offices were allowed reopen. The guidance is now stronger and states "work from home unless absolutely necessary".

BrianD3

ChikiChiki wrote: »

Advice basically hasn't changed.

Regardless, I would question the calibre of any employer who wants their staff in the office when they have remote working capability in the midst of a global pandemic.

The public service - which should be setting an example - is one of the biggest offenders here. I posted a few times about how I was ordered back to the office in late June. There were similar posts on boards.ie from other public servants. I have spoken to people in the HSE and other organisations who have also experienced this

When I was ordered back to the office, I quoted the public health guidelines that people should WFH if possible. I was told that it wasn't possible and I hadn't been doing my job when I was WFH. Which was absolute rubbish but there's no reasoning with some people.

So, back I went to the office to do the exact same work that I had been doing at home - except now with more close contacts :rolleyes:

In terms of Covid-19, things have played out almost exactly as I predicted in late June.

The public service should be setting an example and should be adopting a cautious approach but that would require some level of competence.

hmmm

It's stronger I think than previous guidance. I don't have the exact wording, but what I heard was unless you absolutely have to be in a workplace and can't work from home you shouldn't be there.

martingriff

BrianD3 wrote: »

The public service - which should be setting an example - is one of the biggest offenders here. I posted a few times about how I was ordered back to the office in late June. There were similar posts on boards.ie from other public servants. I have spoken to people in the HSE and other organisations who have also experienced this

When I was ordered back to the office, I quoted the public health guidelines that people should WFH if possible. I was told that it wasn't possible and I hadn't been doing my job when I was WFH. Which was absolute rubbish but there's no reasoning with some people.

So, back I went to the office to do the exact same work that I had been doing at home - except now with more close contacts :rolleyes:

In terms of Covid-19, things have played out almost exactly as I predicted in late June.

The public service should be setting an example and should be adopting a cautious approach but that would require some level of competence.

It is the exact opposite in the department I am in (Revenue). All helplines are closed. A rota of 4 to 5 people in section for 2 or 3 days a week (1 section is responsible for post opening another inputting cheques/bank drafts)

martingriff

hmmm wrote: »

It's stronger I think than previous guidance. I don't have the exact wording, but what I heard was unless you absolutely have to be in a workplace and can't work from home you shouldn't be there.

Well I think they should not use the word should as it is advice rather then a necessity but ya the changing of unless absolutely need to is a good change

Sir Oxman

A lot of the 'ordering' workers back to offices is simply useless management.

gazzer

BrianD3 wrote: »

The public service - which should be setting an example - is one of the biggest offenders here. I posted a few times about how I was ordered back to the office in late June. There were similar posts on boards.ie from other public servants. I have spoken to people in the HSE and other organisations who have also experienced this

When I was ordered back to the office, I quoted the public health guidelines that people should WFH if possible. I was told that it wasn't possible and I hadn't been doing my job when I was WFH. Which was absolute rubbish but there's no reasoning with some people.

So, back I went to the office to do the exact same work that I had been doing at home - except now with more close contacts :rolleyes:

In terms of Covid-19, things have played out almost exactly as I predicted in late June.

The public service should be setting an example and should be adopting a cautious approach but that would require some level of competence.

That's interesting. I'm a Civil Servant and all staff in my Dept are still working from home

gauchesnell

BrianD3 wrote: »

The public service - which should be setting an example - is one of the biggest offenders here. I posted a few times about how I was ordered back to the office in late June. There were similar posts on boards.ie from other public servants. I have spoken to people in the HSE and other organisations who have also experienced this

When I was ordered back to the office, I quoted the public health guidelines that people should WFH if possible. I was told that it wasn't possible and I hadn't been doing my job when I was WFH. Which was absolute rubbish but there's no reasoning with some people.

So, back I went to the office to do the exact same work that I had been doing at home - except now with more close contacts :rolleyes:

In terms of Covid-19, things have played out almost exactly as I predicted in late June.

The public service should be setting an example and should be adopting a cautious approach but that would require some level of competence.

May I ask why did you go back....Im public service and we arent back.

gauchesnell

gazzer wrote: »

That's interesting. I'm a Civil Servant and all staff in my Dept are still working from home

yeah im public service and we are all still wfh.

BrianD3

gauchesnell wrote: »

May I ask why did you go back....Im public service and we arent back.

Well I was told to come back, reference was made to my contract etc. The rest of my dept was already back - they were all unhappy about it. I seem to have been the "thorny nettle" that was left until last to be tackled.

The union was of no assistance, in fact they sided with senior management "well, management want everyone back in the office" was what I was told.

I should point out her that I live with a vulnerable person and have ongoing care difficulties due to withdrawal of services due to Covid. My colleagues who were distressed about coming back had/have childcare issues due to closed creches etc. No empathy was shown by the manager/employer.

gauchesnell

BrianD3 wrote: »

Well I was told to come back, reference was made to my contract etc. The rest of my dept was already back - they were all unhappy about it. I seem to have been the "thorny nettle" that was left until last to be tackled.

The union was of no assistance, in fact they sided with senior management "well, management want everyone back in the office" was what I was told.

I should point out her that I live with a vulnerable person and have ongoing care difficulties due to withdrawal of services due to Covid. My colleagues who were distressed about coming back had/have childcare issues due to closed creches etc. No empathy was shown by the manager/employer.

jaysus thats awful...what union. Im forsa and they are clear it is WFH and to not give in to pressure. By employer do you mean your dept.

bri007

I work in the HSE, we were originally working from home for a few weeks during Covid but then our manager instructed us all back to work and not to work from home again.

We are in an office of 15 sometimes 25 at full capacity with part time/ parental leave etc. No real social distance and very tight spaces. We highlighted concerns to management but were told to continue as is and in no circumstances work from home.

Wouldn’t mind but we were getting a lot more done from home due to less distractions etc. Got in touch with union and they said similar to poster above re- if management say go back you have to go back......

gauchesnell

god thats awful. I work in third level. Back in March Leo announced all universities would close. We didnt ...stayed open. My manager told me I couldnt work from home. I said nope Im working from home and Union supported all of us. Within a week everyone was. She did the whole its important to follow instructions blah blah

I replied I dont follow management advice - I work for the Government.

Yes I am that cranky.

Forsa still supportive now but Id be happy to go back now.

I think the problem lies in who has the discretion to decide who is "absolutely necessary" in the office, or not.

There should be very limited discretion. If someone can work from home, there should only be very limited circumstances where they have to attend the office.

Thankfully, in my dept there has been no pressure to return to the office, we have adapted very well to full time working from home, and my direct manager and senior management have been very supportive of this.

But I have spoken to friends in other depts who have the exact opposite experience and managers who simply do not trust their staff to work from home. So they've been ordered to return to office based working, for no good reason other then their boss can order them back.

gauchesnell

Deleted User wrote: »

I think the problem lies in who has the discretion to decide who is "absolutely necessary" in the office, or not.

There should be very limited discretion. If someone can work from home, there should only be very limited circumstances where they have to attend the office.

Thankfully, in my dept there has been no pressure to return to the office, we have adapted very well to full time working from home, and my direct manager and senior management have been very supportive of this.

But I have spoken to friends in other depts who have the exact opposite experience and managers who simply do not trust their staff to work from home. So they've been ordered to return to office based working, for no good reason other then their boss can order them back.

well yeah fair point. My manager even asked me to sign a work from home contract. Get stuffed.

angel eyes 2012

gauchesnell wrote: »

yeah im public service and we are all still wfh.

I'm a public servant and it is not possible to wfh as we are public facing and the general public depend on us. Also several of our proceeses don't allow for remote working for a multitude of reasons. Personally I get more done in the office but I know I'm in the minority.

gauchesnell

angel eyes 2012 wrote: »

I'm a public servant and it is not possible to wfh as we are public facing and the general public depend on us. Also several of our proceeses don't allow for remote working for a multitude of reasons. Personally I get more done on the office but I know I'm in the minority.

well fair enough. Im looking forward to going back myself. WFH sounds good but 6 months on maybe not.

I get more done at home but I work longer hours aswell.

LuasSimon

Seems mad only 15 people allowed in Croke park and the Aviva whilst Meat factories are packing in 200 staff on top of each other...if not 15 of them into a house to live together......

HartsHat

BrianD3 wrote: »

Well I was told to come back, reference was made to my contract etc. The rest of my dept was already back - they were all unhappy about it. I seem to have been the "thorny nettle" that was left until last to be tackled.

The union was of no assistance, in fact they sided with senior management "well, management want everyone back in the office" was what I was told.

I should point out her that I live with a vulnerable person and have ongoing care difficulties due to withdrawal of services due to Covid. My colleagues who were distressed about coming back had/have childcare issues due to closed creches etc. No empathy was shown by the manager/employer.

Is this a Govt Dept, public sector body, or semi state?

I have heard of no Govt Dept being physically back en masse.

Beasty

Threads merged and title changed

radiotrickster

A few of my colleagues (admin, public service) could a half day to a couple days worth of work from home but our manager has said no. Every other departments has had people in identical roles working from home 2-3 days a week.

Is there anything that can be done about this or anyone you could take it to (e.g. a union)? One of my colleagues has already used all their leave for the year due to childcare and will have to go out on unpaid leave next. A couple of others have kids old enough to stay at home alone but said their mental health is suffering hugely and they're both worried, and a fourth colleague is considered high-risk.

Just concerned about how this will go for all my colleagues at this point! They've asked to work weekends instead for a couple of weekdays off as well and got told no.

gauchesnell

radiotrickster wrote: »

A few of my colleagues could work from home for a half day/full day or two a week (personally I can't). All the other departments where I am have had people in identical roles (all admin) working from home 2-3 days a week. Our manager has said no from the beginning.

Is there anything that can be done about this or anyone you could take it to (e.g. a union)? One of my colleagues has already used all their leave for the year due to childcare and will have to go out on unpaid leave next. A couple of others have kids old enough to stay at home alone but said their mental health is suffering hugely and they're both worried, and a fourth colleague is considered high-risk.

speak to your union immediately. If your colleague is high risk how is she even in the work place. What sector are you in??

MrsBean

Public servant also. Last week I was working in a department operating on a roster system for attendance in the office and was constantly being told by the boss "there is a push for a full return to the office so tell your staff it's coming down the line soon" much to everyone's dismay. Started in a new department this week and was told that once I collect a laptop I won't be back in physical office until 2021!
I completely appreciate when there is a public facing role or work that can only be done on site, but there has definitely been a bull-headed approach to a RTW in many offices. The lack of trust in staff and the unwillingness to hear peoples' concerns really shone through.

HartsHat

I work in a Govt Dept and we have been told no one in office unless essential. This is situation for the foreseeable future.

radiotrickster

gauchesnell wrote: »

speak to your union immediately. If your colleague is high risk how is she even in the work place. What sector are you in??

Public service! They all try to protect themselves by avoiding busy areas (like the staff canteen). They asked the manager could they work from home and explained how they could do it, based on how the other departments were handling it.

Most of the departments had half the office in every day. Where people couldn't work from home at all, they split the staff in three groups and assigned hours, so some worked from 6am-2pm, some 9-5, and the rest 3-10 (or something like that). Then another department managed it with everyone doing three extra long (12/13 hour) shifts a week and having four days off.

We were told by our team leaders to expect the latter but our manager refused and insisted everyone continue as normal.

gauchesnell

MrsBean wrote: »

Public servant also. Last week I was working in a department operating on a roster system for attendance in the office and was constantly being told by the boss "there is a push for a full return to the office so tell your staff it's coming down the line soon" much to everyone's dismay. Started in a new department this week and was told that once I collect a laptop I won't be back in physical office until 2021!
I completely appreciate when there is a public facing role or work that can only be done on site, but there has definitely been a bull-headed approach to a RTW in many offices. The lack of trust in staff and the unwillingness to hear peoples' concerns really shone through.

Wow we got laptops delivered to our homes along with other equipment. We can also have our desktops and chairs delivered to our homes.

Things may change now given the recent advice but seriously talk to your Union.

obi604

In regard to gyms- does not make sense, If the max number of people that can exercise outdoors is 15. How can gyms have 50 or so indoors?

Or am I missing something.

gauchesnell

radiotrickster wrote: »

Public service! They all try to protect themselves by avoiding busy areas (like the staff canteen). They asked the manager could they work from home and explained how they could do it, based on how the other departments were handling it.

Most of the departments had half the office in every day.

Where people couldn't work from home at all, they split the staff in three groups and assigned hours, so some worked from 6am-2pm, some 9-5, and the rest 3-10 (or something like that). Then another department managed it with everyone doing three extra long (12/13 hour) shifts a week and having four days off.

We were told by our team leaders to expect the latter but our manager refused and insisted everyone continue as normal.

hold on...access to your canteen should be controlled. It is not up to you to control it. If we ever get back to my office it is all timed breaks etc.

gauchesnell

radiotrickster wrote: »

Public service! They all try to protect themselves by avoiding busy areas (like the staff canteen). They asked the manager could they work from home and explained how they could do it, based on how the other departments were handling it.

Most of the departments had half the office in every day. Where people couldn't work from home at all, they split the staff in three groups and assigned hours, so some worked from 6am-2pm, some 9-5, and the rest 3-10 (or something like that). Then another department managed it with everyone doing three extra long (12/13 hour) shifts a week and having four days off.

We were told by our team leaders to expect the latter but our manager refused and insisted everyone continue as normal.

ok maybe areas work differently but why is this up to your manager...your manager isnt your employer.

Limpy

obi604 wrote: »

In regard to gyms- does not make sense, If the max number of people that can exercise outdoors is 15. How can gyms have 50 or so indoors?

Or am I missing something.

What your missing in is a proper government.

It sums it up really.

gral6

obi604 wrote: »

In regard to gyms- does not make sense, If the max number of people that can exercise outdoors is 15. How can gyms have 50 or so indoors?

Or am I missing something.

Do you want to shut the gyms too?

laoisfan

AMKC wrote: »

I actually think the caretaker Government and Leo Varadkar were doing a better job advising us what we should not be doing than this new Government under Micheal Martin is currently just giving an unneeded press conference just to boast his own ego.

Leo Varadkar sits around the same table as Micheal Martin and it's a collective decision as to what happens. Whatever you can throw at Micheal you can equally throw at Leo. As for boosting his own ego...look no futher than Leo who has no problem dropping quotes from movies in his press conferences (yes his speech writers included them...but Leo still read them out).

FF and FG are 2 cheeks of the same ar$e...remember that. And the Greens are just useless. Always have been and always will be. And no I'm not a SF supporter either.

Limpy

laoisfan wrote: »

Leo Varadkar sits around the same table as Micheal Martin and it's a collective decision as to what happens. Whatever you can throw at Micheal you can equally throw at Leo. As for boosting his own ego...look no futher than Leo who has no problem dropping quotes from movies in his press conferences (yes his speech writers included them...but Leo still read them out).

FF and FG are 2 cheeks of the same ar$e...remember that. And the Greens are just useless. Always have been and always will be. And no I'm not a SF supporter either.

Don't take the Leo's name in vain. You'll upset a few.

LostDuck

We have an upcoming 50th birthday and planned to go for a meal in a local hotel with family. There was to be 19 attending from 4 households. All family and have been in each other's limited contacts anyway.

With the recent restrictions it appears we would not be able to gather indoors as we're more than 6 people.

I contacted the hotel this evening to cancel but they're telling us no need to cancel... it's fine. We point out the new restrictions but they say no it's fine as we'll be in a seperate room of the restaurant. They said our numbers of near 20 are fine and they're pushing for us to keep the booking.

Have I misread the restrictions??

punisher5112

In pubs or hotel etc rules are different.

The restrictions apply at home basically.

I'd stick with the plans and just follow guidelines.

LostDuck

punisher5112 wrote: »

In pubs or hotel etc rules are different.

We're trying to make sense of the latest restrictions from the Gov site.;

Restaurants and cafes (including pubs that serve food and hotel restaurants)
events, parties or gatherings of more than 6 people indoors or 15 people outdoors are not allowed in these settings

... but we're being told this doesn't apply?

The hotels federation were saying today that the limit is 50, I thought that was just for weddings.

Beasty

threads merged

Polar101

LostDuck wrote: »

We're trying to make sense of the latest restrictions from the Gov site.;

Restaurants and cafes (including pubs that serve food and hotel restaurants)
events, parties or gatherings of more than 6 people indoors or 15 people outdoors are not allowed in these settings

... but we're being told this doesn't apply?

The hotels federation were saying today that the limit is 50, I thought that was just for weddings.

Under "restaurants" it says:
maximum of 6 seated at a table
no formal or informal events or parties should be organised in these premises

---

I thought they said the 50 was for weddings only too. But the Taoiseach also said the message is clear, so...

LostDuck

Polar101 wrote: »

no formal or informal events or parties should be organised in these premises

That's what we thought too, but hotel says that's not the case. They're pushing us for a deposit for the booking too! I think we'll have to cancel but really surprised by the push-back.

bee06

obi604 wrote: »

In regard to gyms- does not make sense, If the max number of people that can exercise outdoors is 15. How can gyms have 50 or so indoors?

Or am I missing something.

Kids soft play can have 50 as well. It’s a joke.

punisher5112

Not sure if it's been discussed or not but look at schools going back.... Pods of 6.... They're still in a class of around 30 with 1 teacher..... Basically they just have to stick together and can't be moved around.... So say kid is been bullied or just don't get on with one at their table well.... Hard luck you are stuck till this all ends.....

They must sit in the same chair each day.... No moving and if they get the bus they are told to sit in the same seat each day..... Laughable these are kids.....

dalyboy

punisher5112 wrote: »

Not sure if it's been discussed or not but look at schools going back.... Pods of 6.... They're still in a class of around 30 with 1 teacher..... Basically they just have to stick together and can't be moved around.... So say kid is been bullied or just don't get on with one at their table well.... Hard luck you are stuck till this all ends.....

They must sit in the same chair each day.... No moving and if they get the bus they are told to sit in the same seat each day..... Laughable these are kids.....

I wondered about this too. Last week my kids teachers asked us to ask our children who they would call “friends” in their respective classes.

I presume the results of all the kids preferences are put in some kind of algorithm to dictate best groupings of the kids to reduce any potential frictions.

It certainly put my mind at ease as it showed me the school is taking this issue seriously and they desire smooth social transition in this differing environment .